Jack's Escape from Mitre Square

[NotBlamedForNothing]

We read that Swanson believed his statement, irrespective of the fact it could not be verified.
However, we also read that "the Leman-street police" did not believe his story.

Which must be of concern to those who believe Schwartz' story - version 1.
What could it have been that the police at Leman street saw or heard, that led them not to believe him?

The way I had it explained to me, the process was that the police hand copies (or the originals?) of all the witness statements to the Coroner's Office. The coroner then reads all the statements and selects only those witnesses who experienced sufficient activities to enable the coroner's jury to determine the 'who, where, when & by what means' the victim met their death.

Which suggests to me, if the police are unable to verify one particular statement then it would not qualify to be handed to the coroner.
This is my interpretation of why Schwartz was not called by Baxter, he never saw his statement.

Were the statements of William Marshall and James Brown, verified?

I think what you're getting at is that by introducing another witness - Pipeman - who's existence cannot be verified, Schwartz' statement is not a valid one for the coroner to consider.
Is that likely though? - surely witnesses are often seeing other witnesses who cannot be immediately located.
Would that be enough to keep a critical statement away from a coroner?

[Wickerman]

Were the statements of William Marshall and James Brown, verified?

They were not key witnesses, so their word can be taken at face value.
Schwartz's statement is on a whole different level. He not only identified another witness, but an assault on the victim & potentially the murderer himself. His statement requires verification.

[JeffHamm]

Seeing the soon to be victim standing next to a man from the club, counts as something unusual.

I'm not following you? Neither Lave nor PC Smith report seeing Stride standing next to a man from the club, and while that would indeed be unusual, it's also describing a situation absent from any of the testimony? Are you referring to somebody else's testimony here, as I'm unaware of anyone identifying Stride with an actual club member?

Especially when he is probably the man standing next to her.

Ah, I think I see where you're going with this. You're speculating that the evidence as given is the complete opposite of what happened, that Lave lied and PC Smith saw Stride with Lave. Got it.

Thus Lave (which is probably a fake name) pretends he was wandering around on the street outside the club for 10 minutes, seeing nothing of consequence.

Yes, that is dramatic. And also quite exciting, since Lave, who wasn't identified by PC Smith in the first place (or he would have indicated "I saw the victim with a man I know to be a member of the club...", decides to approach the press and set up an alibi in case the police do track him down, and cleverly, he uses a fake name so the police won't track him through his press report. Of course, then if he were later approached by the police, given he used a fake name, it sort of negates his ability to claim it as his alibi. And, he also links himself to the club, ensuring they know where to find him, and also, had he said nothing at all, would have avoided drawing attention to the whole thing in the first place. It's starting to show holes.

So the first purpose is to play down the passing police constable's possible sighting of the victim, in both a dead and alive state.
That's the last we hear of Lave, too - he does not appear to be among those who go running for police, so he must stay in the yard, thus allowing him to get (another) good look at the victim.

And ran the risk of being recognized should PC Smith show up at the murder scene, just for jollies.

Presumably Lave's name and address ended up on DI Reid's list of 28 club members.
I have no idea what street he lived in, but a good guess would be that the number was 22.

ha ha! Yes, 22 does show up a fair bit, doesn't it!

Yes, and so does Eagle's return at 12:40.
That's the other point of it - the timing is quite deliberate, and the purpose is to metaphorically clear the stage, in preparation for the incident involving Stride and Schwartz' first man, which can't be hindered by having anyone see it, which is why entries to and exits from the club, magically cease from 5 minutes before Schwartz supposedly turns into Berner St, to the time Diemschitz returns, supposedly at exactly 1 am.

While I think that's a nice critique of your story's plot elements, we are now quite devoid of any real connection with actual evidence beyond noting its rapidly fading influence on the interpretation.

Schwartz 'sees' it, of course, which is why Pipeman/Knifeman has to be invented.

Given there's no known connection of Schwartz with the club, I still don't know why Schwartz would do this for them, or why they would rely upon Schwartz. Moreover, given that Schwartz tells the police a story that implicates a Jewish accomplice, his telling of the events do exactly the opposite of what people say the club was trying to do. Schwartz himself refutes that connection.

So Israel, an endearing young man who goes out all day leaving his supposed wife to move house, and does not come to the assistance of a woman who is supposedly thrown to the ground right in front of him, has an 'excuse' to run away, as far as the rail arch - and thus has no idea, supposedly, as to the fate of the woman.

He had the same excuse 99% of the public has when they ignore a confrontation - people avoid them; except those of us sitting at our desks, we, of course, would act differently had only we been there.

The essence of the Schwartz incident could be defined as the period he witnesses from his entry into Berner street, until the the moment he reaches Ellen street.
It would occupy about 90 seconds.
In this period, Schwartz would traverse past many people either known to be awake at the time, or may have been, not including anyone inside the club.

Who are these many people? Fanny said she was in and out of her house, and as you say, Schwartz is only present for about 90 seconds, so easily could be going by while Fanny was inside. The couple spotted by PC Smith may have moved on, we don't know. And, by his own account, he was spotted, by both BS and Pipeman.

So quite suddenly, there are four people on the street and in the vicinity of #40 - Schwartz sees the other three at close range, yet no one else sees or hears a thing, and neither of the men are ever located by the police.

Well, if BS is JtR, then his lack of being identified is a given. And, there are some reports which could point towards Pipeman having been identified and questioned and released. It's not conclusive, and sadly, we don't have the details, but to say Piipeman was never identified is putting it too strongly. Pipeman might have been identified and questions, but the records have been lost, and what remains is not conclusive.

This just happens to occur directly outside a working men's club, on a night in which about 100 people are in attendance, most of them Jews, and yet here we have a Jewish man walking by alone at nearly 1 am, who has absolutely no involvement with it, regardless of living in the same fairly short street.
It is truly amazing.

How is it amazing? What is amazing about the fact that in a neighborhood with a high Jewish population there would be a club with mostly Jewish members, and that someone in the street happens to be Jewish? Isn't that, well, just kind of what one would expect?

The Schwartz incident is not a real event, rather it is best described by this term; simulacra

And that is one speculative idea. It's just one that is arrived at by first assuming the evidence is the opposite of what happened, without having to demonstrate that is the case.

- Jeff

[Joshua Rogan]

The Schwartz incident is not a real event, rather it is best described by this term; simulacra

Much like all your theories, Pierre.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Nobody calls me 'Pierre'

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Much like all your theories, Pierre.

Pierre / Chris should have finished their book in the near future, May was the last prediction. Wether it gets published is a different kettle of piss. Bet it'd make a great read though, for better or worse.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Yes, that is dramatic. And also quite exciting, since Lave, who wasn't identified by PC Smith in the first place (or he would have indicated "I saw the victim with a man I know to be a member of the club...", decides to approach the press and set up an alibi in case the police do track him down, and cleverly, he uses a fake name so the police won't track him through his press report. Of course, then if he were later approached by the police, given he used a fake name, it sort of negates his ability to claim it as his alibi. And, he also links himself to the club, ensuring they know where to find him, and also, had he said nothing at all, would have avoided drawing attention to the whole thing in the first place. It's starting to show holes.

Joseph Lave is living temporarily at the club, so there no issue in tracking him down.
I find it interesting that he has recently arrived from the United States, similarly to a man who lodges very near by.
The name 'Lave' is not entirely fake, it's just another name he goes by - sort of like Liz Stride/Annie Morris, or Marie Jeanette Kelly.
(BTW, I have an idea what the actual name might be, but still trying to join the dots...)
So there are two important questions.

1. Is the man standing next to Stride, holding the stack of papers, on Reid's list of 28 people at the club?
2. If yes, did Smith get a good enough look at the man, to recognize him later in the club or yard?

Now Smith said he did not get a good look at the man - for example he seems unsure if he has a moustache - and curiously, he does not hear the couple talking.
Why do they apparently go quiet, when the policeman walks by?
If the man is Lave, and Lave has subsequently changed his hat and maybe his coat by the time the PCs arrive, would Smith recognize him?
Probably not, but it is definitely a risk.
The alternative (#1 = 'No') is for the man (someone else) to leave the club and surrounding area, prior to that time.

ha ha! Yes, 22 does show up a fair bit, doesn't it!

Once or twice too often, to just be a coincidence.
Does Israel Schwartz (as of Oct 1) live at 22 Ellen St, or 22 Backchurch Lane, where a Sarah Schwartz seems to have been living in 1885?
On the subject of Schwartz' address, where in Berner St had he and his wife been living?
Presumably somewhere on the club side, between Fairclough and Ellen streets.
I wonder, when Israel tentatively walked back from the rail arch, did he notice a crowd of people outside the gates of #40?
He would have been no further from the action than those that could see the same from Commercial Road.
Did he go back for another look, or did he go somewhere else - somewhere more relevant to this thread, perhaps?

While I think that's a nice critique of your story's plot elements, we are now quite devoid of any real connection with actual evidence beyond noting its rapidly fading influence on the interpretation.

Schwartz claims to have gone out for at least half a day, and left his wife to move their meagre belongings to a new address.
He then claims to walk down Berner St at 12:45 the following morning, to see if his wife is still at the old address.
Let's not be fooled by this absurd story - Schwartz' wife is a simulacrum
Next, he walks by the gates at the precise moment a thuggish man is throwing a woman to the ground.
He then crosses the road, and at that precise moment he sees a man lighting his pipe, who ignores the woman but almost immediately begins following Schwartz with intent, for no apparent reason other than perhaps he has been triggered into action by the thug yelling 'Lipski!'.

This is not evidence for anything, other than an attempted cover-up.

Given there's no known connection of Schwartz with the club, I still don't know why Schwartz would do this for them, or why they would rely upon Schwartz. Moreover, given that Schwartz tells the police a story that implicates a Jewish accomplice, his telling of the events do exactly the opposite of what people say the club was trying to do. Schwartz himself refutes that connection.

Schwartz is an important club member, but more on that another time...

He had the same excuse 99% of the public has when they ignore a confrontation - people avoid them; except those of us sitting at our desks, we, of course, would act differently had only we been there.

Schwartz did not run away from Pipeman, until Joseph Lawende chased him down Duke street.

Who are these many people? Fanny said she was in and out of her house, and as you say, Schwartz is only present for about 90 seconds, so easily could be going by while Fanny was inside. The couple spotted by PC Smith may have moved on, we don't know. And, by his own account, he was spotted, by both BS and Pipeman.

James Brown, the young couple, Charles Letchford and his sister, or this person:

[TS1001] A woman living just opposite says that she was waiting up for her husband and listening for his coming, and she heard nothing to arouse her suspicion.

Well, if BS is JtR, then his lack of being identified is a given. And, there are some reports which could point towards Pipeman having been identified and questioned and released. It's not conclusive, and sadly, we don't have the details, but to say Piipeman was never identified is putting it too strongly. Pipeman might have been identified and questions, but the records have been lost, and what remains is not conclusive.

So why all the interest in this nebulous character?

How is it amazing? What is amazing about the fact that in a neighborhood with a high Jewish population there would be a club with mostly Jewish members, and that someone in the street happens to be Jewish? Isn't that, well, just kind of what one would expect?

About one in five East-Enders were Jewish, I believe.
He is the right age, it was a night for newcomers ('Why Jews should be Socialist'), and it was not one of the nights that women and girls were brought to the club, for the entertainment of the men.
It was almost a men-only night, and given the very young average age, this would be the obvious place to find a man with an ambiguous sexual orientation, like Israel Schwartz.

[DJA]

Hi Al Bundy's Eyes.

The Bureau - Only For Sheep - YouTube

[JeffHamm]

Joseph Lave is living temporarily at the club, so there no issue in tracking him down.

So why not clarify that in your previous post, where you indicate it's "probably a false name" (though give no evidence to back that up), which creates the impression you think he's trying not to be found, etc.? If you just mean it's probably an alias, which was common as we know, then why not just be clear and say so.

I find it interesting that he has recently arrived from the United States, similarly to a man who lodges very near by.

Why? Americans in London, and the Whitechapel area, were not uncommon. What makes you find this sufficiently interesting to worth noting. It's hard to follow what point you're trying to make, although you're doing well at creating "atmosphere". But atmosphere is sophistry, it's a way of convincing people despite not presenting facts yet leaving them with an impression something has been presented.

The name 'Lave' is not entirely fake, it's just another name he goes by - sort of like Liz Stride/Annie Morris, or Marie Jeanette Kelly.
(BTW, I have an idea what the actual name might be, but still trying to join the dots...)

as I noted above, it wasn't clear that Lave as a fake name really just means you think it's his alias, which was common and so unremarkable (as per your examples).

So there are two important questions.

1. Is the man standing next to Stride, holding the stack of papers, on Reid's list of 28 people at the club?
   

1. There is no man standing next to Stride holding a stack of papers. PC Smith reports the man he saw with Stride was holding a newspaper parcel measuring 18" x 6" to 8". I know you've speculated that was a collection of leaflets, but that is just a guess as to what the parcel contained. I could speculate it was the man's chess pieces, or, if I wanted JtR to be a doctor, it was his dissection kit, or if I want a butcher/slaugtherman, a knife set, etc. But just because I can speculate all sorts of things that might fit into a parcel of those dimensions doesn't turn those speculation into a description of what the man *was* reported as holding, which is a newspaper parcel measuring 18" x 6" to 8". It certainly was not described as a stack of papers, therefore you can't state that there was a man standing next to Stride holding such.
   

2. If yes, did Smith get a good enough look at the man, to recognize him later in the club or yard?